Cost Assessment Sample Clauses

Cost Assessment. 4.5.2.1 Main identified cost items 1. Testing of the updated OpenSSL library and verifying that no bugs are introduced. 2. Development of key storage in the SCADA server and handling of keys for the DTLS communication. 3. Testing of Robust (D)TLS in individual customer projects and setting of relevant keys. Additional training will be very limited since this is an embedded function in the DTLS proto- cols and will not be seen by the end users. The additional training cost is negligible. 4.5.2.2 Cost assessment results
View Source
Cost Assessment. 4.4.2.1 Main identified cost items 4.4.2.2 Cost assessment results
View Source
Cost Assessment. An Architect’s Opinion of Probable Construction Cost will be developed based on the proposed project approach and the defined design criteria. The Architect’s Opinion of Probable Construction Cost will be based on Industry Standard Practice and the use of available historic cost data. Cost summaries will be provided, broken down by component. Costs will include those for construction inclusive of escalation. It will be the responsibility of the Architect to notify the CITY immediately if the designated Project Scope cannot be constructed within the established Project Budget. A spreadsheet based costs analysis will be developed in order to estimate the total cost of all the proposed project elements and to determine those elements that can be included within the CITY’s established construction budget. The cost analysis spreadsheet will be reviewed at a meeting with the CITY in order to define which elements will be included in the design.
View Source
Cost Assessment. This paragraph describes the cost assessment methodology. The methodology is mainly based upon a method that has been developed by and used within TNO to perform life cycle cost assessments [1]. This methodology has proved its worth during numerous life cycle cost studies that were performed for underpinning investment decisions. It offers a generic - i.e. suitable for all domains - and logical step-by-step approach and is as such a hands-on methodology that covers the theoretical backgrounds of life cycle cost analysis. Also, advancements in cost as- sessment developed in the FP7 study ValueSec that was performed in 2011 [2] were used.
View Source
Cost Assessment. 4.6.2.1 Main identified cost items 1. The costs really depend on the particular system composi- tion/configuration where the solution is going to be deployed and used, essentially as a software library. In a general case, this requires a software port to (re-)implement and test the whole key man- agement library, while on the other hand the overall functional behaviour of the group key management solution remains unchanged. The fact that it is not necessary to redesign the solu- tion as such compensates the expected effort required to produce and test the porting of the implementation to possibly different hardware platforms, operating systems and network com- munication stacks. Having said that, it is reasonable to estimate such porting/incorporation/installation/re-testing costs for a general case to an amount that is comparable to the cost estimation for the first implementation and testing of the prototype for general purpose hosts, since a complete re- testing in envisaged for security and reliability issues. The cost estimate excludes the purchase costs of smart meters and data concentrators. The costs for use and maintenance is expected to be (close to) zero, since it is a service provided by a software library operating automatically with no need per se for particular ordinary inter- vention. 4.6.2.2 Cost assessment results
View Source
Cost Assessment. ‌ The arbitrator may assess the cost of the hearing room and the arbitrator's fees and expenses to the losing party or may assess such fees and expenses between the parties based on the degree of the party's success or failure in the issues being adjudicated by the arbitrator. The expense and compensation of any witnesses or other participants shall be paid by the party requesting their presence. If both parties require the services of the same individual, the expenses and compensation will be paid equally. Any other expenses shall be borne by the party incurring theexpense. Thesite of arbitrationwill be located in proximity to the site of that dispute.
View Source
Cost Assessment 
View SourceView Similar (2)

Related to Cost Assessment

  • Joint Assessment If the Premises are not separately assessed, Lessee's liability shall be an equitable proportion of the Real Property Taxes for all of the land and improvements included within the tax parcel assessed, such proportion to be conclusively determined by Lessor from the respective valuations assigned in the assessor's work sheets or such other information as may be reasonably available.

  • Performance Assessment 6.1 The Performance Plan (Annexure A) to this Agreement sets out key performance indicators and competencies that needs to be evaluated in terms of – 6.1.1 The standards and procedures for evaluating the Employee’s performance; and 6.1.2 During the intervals for the evaluation of the Employee’s performance. 6.2 Despite the establishment of agreed intervals for evaluation, the Employer may in addition review the Employee’s performance at any stage while the contract of employment remains in force; 6.3 Personal growth and development needs identified during any performance review discussion must be documented in a Personal Development Plan as well as the actions agreed to and implementation must take place within set time frames; 6.4 The Employee’s performance will also be measured in terms of contributions to the goals and strategies set out in the Employer’s Integrated Development Plan (IDP) as described in 6.6 – 6.13 below; 6.5 The Employee will submit quarterly performance reports (SDBIP) and a comprehensive annual performance report at least one week prior to the performance assessment meetings to the Evaluation Panel Chairperson for distribution to the panel members for preparation purposes; 6.6 Assessment of the achievement of results as outlined in the performance plan: 6.6.1 Each KPI or group of KPIs shall be assessed according to the extent to which the specified standards or performance targets have been met (qualitative and quantitative) and with due regard to ad-hoc tasks that had to be performed under the KPI; 6.6.2 A rating on the five-point scale described in 6.9 below shall be provided for each KPI or group of KPIs which will then be multiplied by the weighting to calculate the final score; 6.6.3 The Employee will submit his self-evaluation to the Employer prior to the formal assessment; 6.6.4 In the instance where the employee could not perform due to reasons outside the control of the employer and employee, the KPI will not be considered during the evaluation. The employee should provide sufficient evidence in such instances; and 6.6.5 An overall score will be calculated based on the total of the individual scores calculated above.

  • Risk Assessment An assessment of any risks inherent in the work requirements and actions to mitigate these risks.

  • Conformity Assessment Procedures 1. Each Party shall give positive consideration to accepting the results of conformity assessment procedures of other Parties, even where those procedures differ from its own, provided it is satisfied that those procedures offer an assurance of conformity with applicable technical regulations or standards equivalent to its own procedures. 2. Each Party shall seek to enhance the acceptance of the results of conformity assessment procedures conducted in the territories of other Parties with a view to increasing efficiency, avoiding duplication and ensuring cost effectiveness of the conformity assessments. In this regard, each Party may choose, depending on the situation of the Party and the specific sectors involved, a broad range of approaches. These may include but are not limited to: (a) recognition by a Party of the results of conformity assessments performed in the territory of another Party; (b) recognition of co-operative arrangements between accreditation bodies in the territories of the Parties; (c) mutual recognition of conformity assessment procedures conducted by bodies located in the territory of each Party; (d) accreditation of conformity assessment bodies in the territory of another Party; (e) use of existing regional and international multilateral recognition agreements and arrangements; (f) designating conformity assessment bodies located in the territory of another Party to perform conformity assessment; and (g) suppliers’ declaration of conformity. 3. Each Party shall exchange information with other Parties on its experience in the development and application of the approaches in Paragraph 2(a) to (g) and other appropriate approaches with a view to facilitating the acceptance of the results of conformity assessment procedures. 4. A Party shall, upon request of another Party, explain its reasons for not accepting the results of any conformity assessment procedure performed in the territory of that other Party.

  • No Joint Assessment Borrower shall not, and shall not permit Mortgage Borrower to, suffer, permit or initiate the joint assessment of any Individual Property (a) with any other real property constituting a tax lot separate from such Individual Property, and (b) which constitutes real property with any portion of such Individual Property which may be deemed to constitute personal property, or any other procedure whereby the lien of any taxes which may be levied against such personal property shall be assessed or levied or charged to such real property portion of the Individual Property, except as required by Legal Requirements.